Production S700: Salvo Studios <23L ATX Steel Watercooled Unibody Chassis

[duynguyenle]

To add to my previous post, I saw you said you were thinking about reverting to a dual chamber design, I obviously like the decision, I think everything depends on what you want this case to be primarily suited for.

If we're assuming it is supposed to solely appeal to custom water-cooling people then the 360 rad makes sense but if you're going for max flexibility then I guess a 240 rad makes more sense, moving it to the back into the dual chamber along with the psu should also alleviate most of the problems with cables as they could be neatly tucked away there. The 240 rad could also be used for just the CPU loop if someone wanted to go that way.

Keep up the good work, looking forward to your design, hopefully you won't keep us waiting for too long

the PSU and GFX already pretty well fills out the rear chamber. Where would a 240mm rad fit in? A 25mm fan + 30mm rad is pretty thick (that's like 2.5 PCI slots thick), plus you need to actually leave room for air to enter/exit the fan/radiator stack. This would make the case far too thick in my opinion. Having the rad at the front just like the prototype pictured makes perfect sense (Plus if you're not using an E-ATX board, you can use a thicker radiator which will give you a bit more cooling headroom)

 

[Marvelm]

the PSU and GFX already pretty well fills out the rear chamber. Where would a 240mm rad fit in? A 25mm fan + 30mm rad is pretty thick (that's like 2.5 PCI slots thick), plus you need to actually leave room for air to enter/exit the fan/radiator stack. This would make the case far too thick in my opinion. Having the rad at the front just like the prototype pictured makes perfect sense (Plus if you're not using an E-ATX board, you can use a thicker radiator which will give you a bit more cooling headroom)

GPU stays in front of the motherboard, look at the case thread I quoted, you need around 16-17cm of thickness which is not that much more than using a rad in the front.

 

[grsychckn]

For some reason I missed these last two comments. In response, I've been thinking about the design and if I were to resort back to the dual-chamber design I would probably try to find a way to include a single-slot PCIe mount on the mainboard side just "in front" of it as you look through the window at the mainboard. On the backside I would shorten it up to allow for just 1 x "flex slot" area and the bottom will be for the PSU. That way, an additional 240mm radiator/fan combo could be installed in the flex slot, the GPU on the mainboard side, and the PSU just below the flex slot. That would mean you could run with a 360 + 240 radiator assuming there is enough clearance for the fittings to clear the side panels. This in fact is my biggest concern as I bought two NZXT Neo blocks for my SP3 Epyc CPUs but it was just a little too tall to use with my 16mm fittings. I had to use the Bykski blocks instead and manually drill holes into one so I could flip it 180-degrees for pluming. It was a disaster that could have been avoided with just a few more mm of clearance.

On top of that, increasing the width could mean a 360 rad might be too thin and I may have to consider supporting a 280 rad in the front. As the width of the chassis increases, I will want to only support either a 360 or 280 on the front. The mounting holes to support both make the front panel a horrible mess. It may be possible though to make a separate flat mounting bracket depending on which rad you want to use, but I've got to clean up my old dual-chamber model and see what height and width I need to support for the components first, then I'll figure out the rad situation.

I *may* have some time to work on this in the coming weeks while I wait for the next prototype S402. I might take off a day or two coming up just to give me some time to work on it.

 

[Marvelm]

For some reason I missed these last two comments. In response, I've been thinking about the design and if I were to resort back to the dual-chamber design I would probably try to find a way to include a single-slot PCIe mount on the mainboard side just "in front" of it as you look through the window at the mainboard. On the backside I would shorten it up to allow for just 1 x "flex slot" area and the bottom will be for the PSU. That way, an additional 240mm radiator/fan combo could be installed in the flex slot, the GPU on the mainboard side, and the PSU just below the flex slot. That would mean you could run with a 360 + 240 radiator assuming there is enough clearance for the fittings to clear the side panels. This in fact is my biggest concern as I bought two NZXT Neo blocks for my SP3 Epyc CPUs but it was just a little too tall to use with my 16mm fittings. I had to use the Bykski blocks instead and manually drill holes into one so I could flip it 180-degrees for pluming. It was a disaster that could have been avoided with just a few more mm of clearance.

On top of that, increasing the width could mean a 360 rad might be too thin and I may have to consider supporting a 280 rad in the front. As the width of the chassis increases, I will want to only support either a 360 or 280 on the front. The mounting holes to support both make the front panel a horrible mess. It may be possible though to make a separate flat mounting bracket depending on which rad you want to use, but I've got to clean up my old dual-chamber model and see what height and width I need to support for the components first, then I'll figure out the rad situation.

I *may* have some time to work on this in the coming weeks while I wait for the next prototype S402. I might take off a day or two coming up just to give me some time to work on it.

Just a single slot PCIE at the front? That would basically mean you need to watercool the GPU.

 

[grsychckn]

Just a single slot PCIE at the front? That would basically mean you need to watercool the GPU.

Oh no, I mean there would be a single-slot PCIe slot in front of the mainboard, but the flex slot in the other chamber could house either more PCIe devices or another radiator. In fact, if you look at the existing S700 prototype #2, you can see how on the back side the WX9100 is mounted in the middle flex slot but I designed it to also allow for a 240mm radiator to be mounted instead. The same flex slot above the WX9100 is used to mount 2x3.5" 8TB drives in fact. The only problem I have with the flex slot is the awkwardness of how it's mounted to the chassis, but I would definitely make that better/easier.

 

[Marvelm]

Oh no, I mean there would be a single-slot PCIe slot in front of the mainboard, but the flex slot in the other chamber could house either more PCIe devices or another radiator. In fact, if you look at the existing S700 prototype #2, you can see how on the back side the WX9100 is mounted in the middle flex slot but I designed it to also allow for a 240mm radiator to be mounted instead. The same flex slot above the WX9100 is used to mount 2x3.5" 8TB drives in fact. The only problem I have with the flex slot is the awkwardness of how it's mounted to the chassis, but I would definitely make that better/easier.

What I mean is I would much rather have the GPU in front of the motherboard like on the renders with the single chamber design. I am not interested in making a custom loop at all to be honest

 

[grsychckn]

To add to my previous post, I saw you said you were thinking about reverting to a dual chamber design, I obviously like the decision, I think everything depends on what you want this case to be primarily suited for.

What I mean is I would much rather have the GPU in front of the motherboard like on the renders with the single chamber design.

So I'm a little confused as to whether you are lobbying for a single or dual-chamber design. Correct me if I'm wrong but what it seems you want is a dual-chamber design where there is plenty of room to mount a 2 or 3-slot GPU in front of the mainboard. If that is what you're looking for, I'm afraid it's not something I'm going to be able to provide. The volume increase alone would present a challenge to be efficient. The situation could be different if I only supported FlexATX PSUs in a separate chamber and supported more than 1 mount. Or if I only supported ITX or mATX motherboards. Then it would be more like a larger loque ghost, etc.

Alternatively, just by increasing the width of the mainboard chamber a few mm would allow for AIOs to be installed. No need for a custom loop. It would support air-cooled GPUs and CPU-based AIOs. Or, if you ever decide to go open loop, you could do that too.

 

[duynguyenle]

So I'm a little confused as to whether you are lobbying for a single or dual-chamber design. Correct me if I'm wrong but what it seems you want is a dual-chamber design where there is plenty of room to mount a 2 or 3-slot GPU in front of the mainboard. If that is what you're looking for, I'm afraid it's not something I'm going to be able to provide. The volume increase alone would present a challenge to be efficient. The situation could be different if I only supported FlexATX PSUs in a separate chamber and supported more than 1 mount. Or if I only supported ITX or mATX motherboards. Then it would be more like a larger loque ghost, etc.

Alternatively, just by increasing the width of the mainboard chamber a few mm would allow for AIOs to be installed. No need for a custom loop. It would support air-cooled GPUs and CPU-based AIOs. Or, if you ever decide to go open loop, you could do that too.

I'm actually quite pleased with the layout of the prototype as-is, is there any issues with this aside from the length of PCIe riser needed (and maybe signal integrity issues resulting)? I guess you could put the PSU at the top and let the bottom two slots be PCIe, would this make it any better? I like the idea of a full 360mm radiator support in a small-ish form factor like this (basically with the frontal area being basically the minimum required to fit the triple rad itself and not much else)

 

[Marvelm]

So I'm a little confused as to whether you are lobbying for a single or dual-chamber design. Correct me if I'm wrong but what it seems you want is a dual-chamber design where there is plenty of room to mount a 2 or 3-slot GPU in front of the mainboard. If that is what you're looking for, I'm afraid it's not something I'm going to be able to provide. The volume increase alone would present a challenge to be efficient. The situation could be different if I only supported FlexATX PSUs in a separate chamber and supported more than 1 mount. Or if I only supported ITX or mATX motherboards. Then it would be more like a larger loque ghost, etc.

Alternatively, just by increasing the width of the mainboard chamber a few mm would allow for AIOs to be installed. No need for a custom loop. It would support air-cooled GPUs and CPU-based AIOs. Or, if you ever decide to go open loop, you could do that too.

Thanks for the long post, I would indeed love a case with a front mountrd GPU and dual chamber that's why I was lobbying to remove the front radiator and only have a 240mm mount in the back chamber so the volume remains the same (roughly 18L).

I'm not sure I understand your last sentence, does it refer back to the single chamber design with 360 AIO?

To be clear about that, I have absolutely nothing against the single chamber EXCEPT the absolutel madness with cable management but making a second chamber only for PSU hardly makes any sense for the volume that would need to added so I think to keep the volume in check (under 20L I guess, retaining the GPU placement in front of the mobo) it's either a single chamber with the PSU on top as in the renders (looking great, cable management is a challenge) or dual chamber with the radiator moved to the back and changed to a 240mm.

Keeping a 360mm rad in front with dual chamber AND keeping the GPU placement would indeed require the case to probably be around 23-24L I imagine. You could obviously move the GPU to the back chamber instead of the second rad but I think the case loses it's magic if you remove the GPU from the frontal position.

Ultimately it's obviously your design, I don't want to sound like I'm pushing anything, I am wildly interested in this case anyhow

 

[grsychckn]

Thanks for the long post, I would indeed love a case with a front mountrd GPU and dual chamber that's why I was lobbying to remove the front radiator and only have a 240mm mount in the back chamber so the volume remains the same (roughly 18L).

I'm not sure I understand your last sentence, does it refer back to the single chamber design with 360 AIO?

To be clear about that, I have absolutely nothing against the single chamber EXCEPT the absolutel madness with cable management but making a second chamber only for PSU hardly makes any sense for the volume that would need to added so I think to keep the volume in check (under 20L I guess, retaining the GPU placement in front of the mobo) it's either a single chamber with the PSU on top as in the renders (looking great, cable management is a challenge) or dual chamber with the radiator moved to the back and changed to a 240mm.

Keeping a 360mm rad in front with dual chamber AND keeping the GPU placement would indeed require the case to probably be around 23-24L I imagine. You could obviously move the GPU to the back chamber instead of the second rad but I think the case loses it's magic if you remove the GPU from the frontal position.

Ultimately it's obviously your design, I don't want to sound like I'm pushing anything, I am wildly interested in this case anyhow

Thank you for clarifying. I think I see what you mean. If I were to continue with the single chamber design, I was already thinking I would add a part that would be used to cover the area just behind the PSU for cable management reasons. I'll have to play around with both designs and see what make sense to me the most.

The other thing to consider is that the dual-chamber design is much more expensive to produce because it takes twice the machine time to bend the panels compared to a single chamber design. So part of my decision will have to be whether or not I want to produce something that is more affordable or perhaps more niche and high-end. My experience with producing a high-end product has been that usually the target audience already has many choices and expectations are very high (as they should be). It's much more difficult to produce something that meets or exceeds expectations. Either way, I'll do my best which is all I can do and see where the chips fall. In the next few weeks I'll try to open up the models and start modifying them using the lessons learned from my S700 prototype builds.

 

[Marvelm]

Thank you for clarifying. I think I see what you mean. If I were to continue with the single chamber design, I was already thinking I would add a part that would be used to cover the area just behind the PSU for cable management reasons. I'll have to play around with both designs and see what make sense to me the most.

I hope a windowed panel on the GPU side will be possible, would be stupid to hide something so nice

 

[grsychckn]

I hope a windowed panel on the GPU side will be possible, would be stupid to hide something so nice

In either "case", the the GPU will be windowed. I need to design a great solution that allows for venting while incorporating some better scratch resistance than acrylic. I've even thought of cutting the acrylic with a screen protector layer on top to provide protection but I have to get my laser cutter back which might not happen until July.

 

[vutorious]

I stumbled upon your prototype while looking to downsize my ATX rig, without having to essentially replace all of my components for an mATX or mITX SFF build. That being said, I had a question about how cable management would work in the S600. I really was looking forward to the original dual chamber S700 design as it looks like it would make it easy to hide the abundant power supply cables - that paired with the design to not be like everyone else.

 

[Kit]

How far is this out, I was going to get a Core G3 but this looks allot better?

 

[grsychckn]

How far is this out, I was going to get a Core G3 but this looks allot better?

At this point all my spare energy and resources are being poured into the S402 with a hopeful release date in April/May. I am going to go back and refine the design for the S700 but even if I do I'm guessing availability won't be until late Q3 or Q4 this year. Basically, if you have a need for a case in the next several months, I would suggest not to wait on the S700. I'm sorry but lately I've been working a lot and my youngest is draining the life out of us right now so I just don't have the energy to split it between two designs in my "free" time. I'd love to get some feedback for what you like and what you'd like to see though so let me know. I will update this thread as I can and have information to provide.

 

[Kit]

At this point all my spare energy and resources are being poured into the S402 with a hopeful release date in April/May. I am going to go back and refine the design for the S700 but even if I do I'm guessing availability won't be until late Q3 or Q4 this year. Basically, if you have a need for a case in the next several months, I would suggest not to wait on the S700. I'm sorry but lately I've been working a lot and my youngest is draining the life out of us right now so I just don't have the energy to split it between two designs in my "free" time. I'd love to get some feedback for what you like and what you'd like to see though so let me know. I will update this thread as I can and have information to provide.

I like the overall aesthetic and design but the bit that confuses me is pump/reservoir placement, I see you addressed it early in the thread but I feel it's something to be super clear about in your final design concept as this case has watercooling sff focus.

 

[grsychckn]

I like the overall aesthetic and design but the bit that confuses me is pump/reservoir placement, I see you addressed it early in the thread but I feel it's something to be super clear about in your final design concept as this case has watercooling sff focus.

I understand. If we are talking about the dual-chamber design, the pump/res combo will have to be located between the PSU and the radiator but will be limited in height to around 120mm which seriously limits the pump/res combo choices. If I move forward with a single chamber design the pump/res will most likely have a mounting point directly behind the fans/rad using a 120mm mounting bracket. This configuration would allow for a much larger reservoir. The other optional location for the pump/res would be directly behind the PSU in either a horizontal or vertical orientation. I'd have to figure out what margin there is in both locations for error though.

 

[Kit]

Suggestion: You can also design it so that a d5 pump mounts to the 360mm rad in the centre fan mount using a bracket and a reservoir can be flat mounted between PSU and radiator, d5 are just so much better than anythen else out there and this will allow easier cable management than the upright ddc combo you have rendered

 

[grsychckn]

Opened up the S600 & S700 models today for the first time in a while and wanted to ask for some feedback on the following questions:

1. What hardware would you plan to use in the S700? (Specifically, what motherboard/CPU/GPU/Storage)
2. Would an SFX PSU be sufficient? If not, what wattage would you target?
3. Are you planning on watercooling?
--3a. What radiator compatibility would you need?
--3b. Would you be interested in using an air-cooled GPU and watercooled CPU configuration?
4. Would you rather have the option of custom Acrylic side panels (your logo etched with custom vent patterns), or solid tempered glass? (Tempered Glass would require watercooling CPU/GPU, not sure how I'd manage the PSU)
5. What price point are you targeting?

 

[Vacceo]

I´d go for a Crosshair VIII Impact or any other DTX (or mini ITX) board; preference on the DTX. Why? Because the radiator would be a HWL GTX. That is plenty of cooling capacity for a CPU and GPU. The thickness would be relatively big, around 80mm counting fans. Storage should be irrelevant as it´d be on M.2 drives.

Regarding the pump-res combo, I´d got for an EK flat reservoir with a DDC or D5 depending on the depth of the side to side configuration (as it would be quite low on the loop, allowing easy filling and drain). And finally, yes, I´d like the option to see the loop flowing.

Price, well, if TG is in the equation, I assume it will not be cheap.